Will there be an end to it? - (the winglets)

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: 02 Mar 2007, 03:01

Will there be an end to it? - (the winglets)

Post

Saw some pictures of McLaren in test today and the thing is looking like a golden fish... The trend is to have cars completely covered with airflow shaping devices. The limit, as of today, is sponsorship presentation. Will the purposed rules halt this?

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

Image

rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: 02 Mar 2007, 03:01

Post

Image

Getting close...

modbaraban
modbaraban
0
Joined: 05 Apr 2007, 17:44
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Re: Will there be an end to it? - (the winglets)

Post

rjsa wrote:Will the purposed rules halt this?
That would be another awful decision by FIA. Each team has developed it's own unique aero package. Different cars need different solutions for further improvement (like airflow shaping). I'd rather look at differently looking cars with ugly X-wings on half of the grid than a spec series. :twisted:

PS: it's a silver fish :wink:

rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: 02 Mar 2007, 03:01

Post

Image

Silver fish then...

modbaraban, I think exactly the opposite... and I don't think something like a convex hull rule would render spec alike series...

Ogami musashi
Ogami musashi
32
Joined: 13 Jun 2007, 22:57

Post

They would be far less present if the dimensions of bodywork and wings were not so constrained.

In 2009 you'll see less of that and possibly even less in 2011 with the "box rules".


Yeah i suppose 2008 will be another take-my-vortex-in-your-face season.

zac510
zac510
22
Joined: 24 Jan 2006, 12:58

Post

I like airflow shaping. It means cars and aerodynamcs are becoming better and more efficient :)

Ogami musashi
Ogami musashi
32
Joined: 13 Jun 2007, 22:57

Post

I do like it but know it is based on vortex generators and flow contamination (flow coming from a forward device to influence the boundary layer of one surface) witch ends anytime in either too high turbulence or up washes.

Like with plane, work can be done in laminar flow, laminar flow are better both for downforce generation and drag reduction because they stay attached, so tunable easily and far more stable.

Come on we can design wings with 60% Mean Aerodynamic Chord of laminar flows at Mach 2, i'm sure we can do it with a formula 1, at least to an extent it won't prevent the guy's following you and being quicker to overtake you(not talking about facilitating it).

Other than that, yes i'm pretty happy that an F1 car nowadays ranges at 5 L/D ratio where in 1994 it was around 1,5.

Now that's efficient.

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

Ogami musashi wrote:Other than that, yes i'm pretty happy that an F1 car nowadays ranges at 5 L/D ratio where in 1994 it was around 1,5.

Now that's efficient.
In 1994 cars were 2 meters wide, on wide slicks with 3.5 liter engines. That made a lot of difference for sure.

Ogami musashi
Ogami musashi
32
Joined: 13 Jun 2007, 22:57

Post

the wide slicks did do a lot i think,also cooling and the engines you're right.
From 2009 the F1 cars will be 2 meter wide again with rear wings up to that width and higher, the L/D ratio however according to FIA will increase significantly but for sure we know have far more knowledge in aeros.

Tires will also be wider.

mx_tifoso
mx_tifoso
0
Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 05:01
Location: North America

Post

Ogami musashi wrote:Tires will also be wider.
In comparison to 2007? Or mid-90's?

Slicks will return as well IIRC :!:
Forum guide: read before posting

"You do it, then it's done." - Kimi Räikkönen

Por las buenas soy amigo, por las malas soy campeón.

User avatar
MMUK
0
Joined: 08 Apr 2007, 05:35

Post

Ogami musashi wrote:
Like with plane, work can be done in laminar flow, laminar flow are better both for downforce generation and drag reduction because they stay attached, so tunable easily and far more stable.
Not necessarily. A laminar boundayr layer will seperate much sooner due to the smaller velocity gradient near the wall surface.

In a turbulent boundary layer the random nature of the flow means energy from the freestream is passed into the lower regions of the boundary layer, thus increasing the velocity gradient (dv/dy) near the wall.

Laminar flow does result in a reduction in skin friction drag which is the dominant drag mechanism for streamlined devices (like airfoils). But for big ugly bluff bodies, like an F1 car, pressure drag is the dominant drag mechanism, so turbulence in the boundary layer actually becomes beneficial in order to delay separation. Laminar boundary layers will seperate much earlier, and thus will lead to an increase in pressure drag.

Shark skin and golf ball dimples innit!

rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: 02 Mar 2007, 03:01

Post

Yeah i suppose 2008 will be another take-my-vortex-in-your-face season.
Spot on, that's hoe I see the thing.
I like airflow shaping. It means cars and aerodynamcs are becoming better and more efficient
I wouldn't say that suffering severe loss of performance by getting less than 1 second behind another car is efficient for a rece car.

modbaraban
modbaraban
0
Joined: 05 Apr 2007, 17:44
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Post

I was going to ask this anyway so I'll post it here.

Creating 'difficult' airflow behind some particular car is indeed beneficial for the team, making life harder for the opponents (struggling to overtake).
Is this aspect worth considering for a team while developing a competative car?!

rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: 02 Mar 2007, 03:01

Post

Id say it is worth and is taken into account. But That's a wild guess. And this is why I think about winglets as I do.